The Meaning of the Expansion Pack Poll Results (IMO)

my 2 cents on your post.

i believe 1.2 and 1.3 will come out before the expension pack, 1.2 and 1.3 are for free but will see improvements on IA, battles and i believe UI to (not sure) (1.2 will feature those things already, not sure what 1.3 will bring.)

so i think they are doing exactly as you said.

second, i believe its not easy or maybe even impossible to make a IA just like a human.
i've been playing C&C generals and counterstrike (with bot) in the last few days and i'm still amazed how stupid the IA is lol.
while in GC2 they are pretty ok, though improvements can be made (like more agression or FS or things like that).
but i think GC2 already has one of the best if not the best IA in the gaming world in such a huge game

They aren't talking about putting out the expansion until the fall. Which gives them about 3 to 6 months to patch most of the known issues.

My sentiments exactly.

How about the combat visual? I'm starting to hate the "nodding up and down" of huge ships...looks SILLY.

And why, when you have 3 small ships and one huge, do the huge ships take the front position? This just looks silly.

Small ships in front!

turn those visuals of
i like my games fast (gigantic maps already take like 10 hours on my computer) so i have all those visuals of, i don't need the graphics to look great, i want a good gameplay with galcivII. (and thats what i get to)

The AI has been improved in recent patches and you can see the difference anywhere you look in the game (the buildings AI uses, the ships it redesigns etc). I could come up with a list of things I want the game to be but the way I see it is this; the game I bought was fantastic and any content from the patches are a welcome bonus but not expected. I can sit and play the game I bought without them.

I definately wouldnt go and say :

"I don't think they should try to sell an expansion until:

- UI Cleanup (GC2 Interface is very unpolished)
- AI improved (military and trade) "

Seriously what is wrong with the AI in military and trade that deems it so broken it needs fixed? Some bullet points would do really. I find the UI is not the best but few things are . Any game can be improved and made better - but what is so drastically wrong here that I have missed?

Seriously, dont take this the wrong way, I want to know.

Seriously what is wrong with the AI in military and trade that deems it so broken it needs fixed?

My gripes with the AI are mostly to do with how it mismanges invasions and fleet action generally. The change to simul combat will clean that up on the fleet action side (hopefully) in that the AIs inability to land first strike attacks will be meaningless. But the AI still doesn't seem to have a handle on how to keep its transports alive until they reach their target. Sure they make 'escort' ships, but those ships are entirely useless.

Transports should be placed in the same square as whatever fleets the AI has in the area, no exceptions!

Given how Brad has already described the problems relating to having the AI determine what 'safe' space is this is the only fix that makes any sense what so ever.

Some AIs also still don't quite get planetary development. They overbuild farms/influance buildings/morale centers on planets which could otherwise be powerhouses. Hell I've still seen them build various capitols on planets with zero or one of the accompaning labs or factories.

I haven't got any desire to play a turn based strategy game online. I get the impression that most of the people here would rather have other things. The outcry for multiplayer seems to come mostly from reviewers rather than customers.

I'd rather see stuff like

- New races (especially more badguys). I'd like more information to be shown about their culture and physiology. I'd like certain races to be better suited to certain planets, perhaps depending upon atmosphere, or water availability, etc). I'd like to see minor and major races treated the same; which races appeared in the UP would be determined by population. They should all have animated appearances. I don't like having races which are underdeveloped, or exist only for comedy value (snathi) because this ruins immersion for me and makes the game seem unprofessional.

- Better technology tree (how come a warp drive V is faster than a IV, whearas all impulse drives are the same speed, as are all hyper drives? How come some things are named Enhanced/Advanced/Superior, whereas other things are 1, 2, 3 etc? I can never remember whether enhanced is better than advanced. Why are the progressions so linear? Perhaps their could be "super weapons" that combine multiple technologies, and can only be used by the first civ to research them)

- More interesting locations. There could be collapsed, neutron star systems which are uninhabitable but rich in resources. Ships might not be able to survive in them without special equipment. There could be binary star systems, planets where one side always faces the sun, planets which are highly volvanic, planets which have been knocked out of orbit and drift through space etc. Perhaps you could add a module which allowed you to colonize gas planets, like Cloudbase in Star Wars.

- Racial policy. Why is it assumed that populations are completely exterminated after conquest? Players could decide whether they wanted their empire to be all-inclusive or racially pure. Different planets would have different races and the civ might end up recieving a variety of new bonuses, while loosing old ones. Things like immigration could come into effect etc. I could go on all day.

I'd like the ability to make useless planets productive, at the very least as some sort of outpost to extend range. I don't remember if there's Terror Stars in the game, I've never progressed that far but those would be cool. Perhaps an ability to expand on that, like recreating the star and rebuilding to planets for your own use.

That was favorite stage of gameplay in MOO2, when I didn't care about expanding my empire anymore and just took my Doom Stars on rampages turning solar systems into asteroid dust.

I want multiplayer and a better tech tree. Maybe more specialty componeants.

One thing I definately would like to see is better "MOO2 style" ground combat. I hate this MOO1 style invade with colonists thing they have going now.

Some people want controllable battles, that would be nice too but its not like MOO2 where you would have just one or two battles every few turns, so it would get annoying and a bad idea.

I'd like the ability to make useless planets productive

I like to do the opposite, make productive planets, useless. Planetary bombardment, then destroy colony does the trick nicely!

Any PQ 7 or lower gets this treatment.

Roll on the death stars!

Stardock say they r making 2 expansions, 1 with loads of extras for single player use, which I will buy. The other largely dedicated to multi player (60% - 80% I believe), which I will not bother with. This is fine with me, but if the second expansion is going to be largely multi player, then why not dedicate it to 100% multi player? It would bug me a little, , to miss a few single player features, but not enough to buy it when its largly multi player.

I like the idea of new ships-plus they made a hull designer i reckon that'd be pretty cool-oh plus some more 'building block' like jewllery so we can make more precise designs.
I think yeah more information and cultural flavour in the presentation and interaction should be implemented-the races seem pretty identical in character wen you actually play the game-and...

I WANT TO PLAY AS THE DREAD LORDS!!!

Adding Hotseat and Lan play to the game would NOT take the drastic amount of resources they claim it will. You have the code, instead of checking the ai routines, dump to the interface and let the UI (next player) decide what to do next. They could slap it on with a patch, and if that is all they are going to do with multiplayer then they can forget about anyone paying $20 for it. They *should* do at least that though, if only to appease people so they can ignore the hard work of doing a really GOOD multiplayer expansion.

If they want (and they don't, that should be obvious) to add a proper multiplayer expansion that allows for internet gaming, they would need to overhaul almost the entire game.

- Simultaneous turns would be a MUST. Seriously, why anyone would think that leaving it at the current sequential turn system would be a viable option in multiplayer is beyond my comprehension

- Races would need to be balanced. Right now it doesn't take a genius to figure out that Yor (for example) are better than Humans. In single player mode that doesn't matter. If you want to give yourself the best chance to survive, pick Yor. If you want a challenge, pick Human. In multiplayer that doesn't fly. My guess is, given the complexity of the game, this would be the most challenging aspect to do right without turning all the races into a different flavor of vanilla, (french vanilla, homemade vanilla, vanilla bean, etc). One could argue that they already are, but that's a subject for a different thread I think.

- The in-game diplomacy system would need to change. Something that needs to happen anyways even in single player as far as I'm concerned (wish I has access to the ai routines to mod their behavior in diplomacy). In Multiplayer though, as it stands now the whole "diplomacy" trait would be a joke. Either get rid of it altogether or make it absolutely integral to the game (example: you can only make a "best offer" according to your diplmacy ratings and once put forth, the other player simply accepts, no option to deny. It would make diplomacy tech HUGE probably, and therefor would need to be more expensive. This would include enforced peace treaties for x number of weeks, and probably many other things that I haven't bothered to think all the way through)

- Even with simultaneous turns the game would be too long to play in one sitting on anything larger than a small map. To compensate for this, allow games to be saved to be restarted later and any players that do not return for the continuation can: Have their empire controlled by the ai, can automatically have their empire surrender to their weakest or strongest ally, or largest, smallest neighbor, whichever the players choose at the beginning of the game. The same can go for players that quit partway through. More varied victory conditions may also be an option (whoever has the most influence by turn 100 wins. Or a king of the hill game, whoever controls the central planet by turn x wins. Just examples)

- UI Changes to make more things automatic (a "best offer" diplmacy button, an upgrade this ship design with my best current weapons button, set Tax level to the highest setting without pushing any planet below 50%, 75%, 100% approval button, etc) to streamline some of the more time intensive but trivial parts of the game would be a plus as well.

- There's probably many other things that would NEED to happen to make this game worthwhile in a true multiplayer sense, (game matching based on player ability for example) a lot of which I'm sure I haven't thought of yet, and frankly I've thought about this subject too much, call it a pipe dream I guess.

If all of that were done to make a *true* multiplayer expansion, I would gladly pay as much as I did for the original game, not just $20.

Do I think it's ever going to happen? Nope not by a long shot. Multiplayer doesn't seem to be in Stardocks vision for this game. Too bad, I always considered single player games to be similar to masturbation, fun in it's own way, but never as good as sex.

Very thoughtful replies guys and I even see a few suggestion I have not thought of that would be a welcome addition to the core aspects of GalCiv2.

Thank you for your reply gmjapan, I purposely gave a general list of improvements because I didn't want start a "List of Demands." I appreciate the support the developers have given and the time they have taken to amend the weaknesses and problems of GalCiv2 and as a non-programmer with a casual interest in AI I do understand it would a magnificent (prolly Nobel Prize winning feat) to create an AI equivilent to a human being so even as a demanding customer I would never be that unrealistic.

However there are AI Issues such as fleet management (or mismanagement) and economy build inefficiencies that make the AI much weaker then it should be.

I think there are more then a few threads that articulate the current shortcomings of the AI (especially regarding the Military aspects) and the Trade. I don't want to repeat all of it here because I know the developers are aware of them, they have responded to the threads with the applicable issues.

I do appreciate some of the other suggestions made on this thread especially the Simultanous Turns! I remember that from Risk II and SE4! Very cool option but not something I would consider vital... if THAT was a feature in an expansion pack it would very much inspire me to buy it but it is not something I expect or need to see in a patch because there are far more fundamental issues at hand that I would like to see worked on.

Thanks for the replies,

PantlessOne

I wasn't surprised at the results of the poll.

Remember the early debates about the lack of MP? Back then the developers (plus the fanboys) gave a rousing defense on why MP sucked, and they succueeded by and large in converting the neturals (those who disagreed were driven off).

The irony is they oversold the idea, such that currently people are dead AGAINST MP heh.

No, I believe Quitch correctly posted this as a response to the official thread:

What we're seeing here is the multiplayer crowd vastly overrating themselves in terms of their importance, as per usual.

Too bad, I always considered single player games to be similar to masturbation, fun in it's own way, but never as good as sex.

So, multiplayer is group masterbation?

Keep the MP war off this thread please.

The point I was trying to make was I would like to see improvements in the core aspects of the game specifically the AI. If you want to submit other core aspect you wish to see improved I welcome that but adding major features like MP is something that should belong in a different thread.

I would like to keep this thread about imrpoving UI and AI.

Thanks guys,

PantlessOne

So, multiplayer is group masterbation?

Good one!

no, multiplayer isnt group masturbation.

but talking about it like its gonna happen, is.


i'm just sayin.

-0.

as for improving the UI--i am all for that. it is my understanding that that is happening. whether it meets anyone's expectations outside SD is another matter. clearly, they will hear about when it isn't.

if it were up to me, and my sense of entitlement allowed it, i would want to spend the entire budget on AI development. not only will it improve the game--but Frogboy/Draginol/Brad Steve Ted Carrol and Alice's skills in AI development would improve as well. which, in the long run (GalCiv 3 or whatever game AI he codes next), can only contribute positively.

i am not saying he is a bad programmer. only that growth and development happens naturally as one gains experience.

kinda like sex.

or d&d. depending on your age group.


-0.